PDA

View Full Version : DD is the reason for losing according to Playbook


MIGHTYTEX
12-11-2004, 03:49 PM
I was watching Playbook on the NFL channel. They previewed the Colts and Texans game and how Carr to Johnson is working out and will be big in years to come. Then they were talking about our record and how in the last 5 games we only won one game and that was when DD ran for 100 yards. They said that the passing game isn't the problem, o-line isn't the problem its DD and his inconsistancy. I found that interesting how they just put the blame on DD. What do you guys think about that?

Vinny
12-11-2004, 03:58 PM
I think the line has played well in the second half of the season so far. I think many people see DD as a problem position because if you cannot rely on your running back to be productive game-in, game-out you will have problems. Just look at the Cowboy offense and how much better their line looks now that Jones is running the ball.

I think this is one of the most important areas to address for the Texans. Dom will make a fine 3rd down back and complimentary back, but if he is your lead back you need some help.

The Texans have multiple problems so I think Dom isn't the only reason we are not a dynamic team yet. We are in year 3 and we need to be patient as we continue to add starters going into year 4. I expect us to compete this year, but there is too much finger pointing to me.

Keldar
12-11-2004, 04:08 PM
While DD might not be a feature back, and may not be our back of the future. For those guys to blame the woes of losing thus far, on him individually, is a bunch of hogwash.

He may magnify a team that has flaws and lack of depth, but he certainly would have been more successful if the other players would have been executing better,(o-line, Carr, etc.)

Vinny
12-11-2004, 04:23 PM
You can't count on him though. How do you build a ground game around a back who may or may not be ready to go in a league that has a short 16 game schedule? Every game is incredibly important (unlike in the NBA or the MLB's where you can miss time here and there and not affect the team), and not knowing if your feature back will be ready to play is a big problem if you want to be anything other than a .500 team.

shansmacker
12-11-2004, 05:23 PM
Its the o-line period.How many times have we seen these guys get handled on short yardage situations,how many hard hits has Carr taken at critical times in the game.Until these guys can give consistant protection and consistantly impose their will on the oppisition we"ll continue to struggle offensivly.DD may not be the answer at rb but he certianly isnt the reason for our offensive woes imo.

wiley2002
12-11-2004, 05:30 PM
I dont put the blame on DD. If you go back and look at that footage of Julius Jones romping the Seahawks in the 4th quarter, you'll see that there were key blocks made by the o-line. Yes he dodged a few tackles here and there but he can't do it all by himself. I'm still for drafting another RB but I believe we still need to better our o-line. Maybe we should trade for the Colts o-line. :jk:

CrumplerFan
12-11-2004, 10:00 PM
I would say, there isn't a straight answer like that possible.

DD or the Line, or both. Or is the defense too bad and force them to score every drive? Can the line and Dom get better or harmonise better to get a more constant running attack? It isn't impossible at least.

There isn't a better HB on the roster for now and the OLine needs experience. Both have some more games to develop. Perhaps that opinion is a bit tame, but...

infantrycak
12-11-2004, 10:23 PM
I think the line has played well in the second half of the season so far. I think many people see DD as a problem position because if you cannot rely on your running back to be productive game-in, game-out you will have problems. Just look at the Cowboy offense and how much better their line looks now that Jones is running the ball.

I think this is one of the most important areas to address for the Texans. Dom will make a fine 3rd down back and complimentary back, but if he is your lead back you need some help.

The Texans have multiple problems so I think Dom isn't the only reason we are not a dynamic team yet. We are in year 3 and we need to be patient as we continue to add starters going into year 4. I expect us to compete this year, but there is too much finger pointing to me.

Well, well would depend on your definition of well. How is that for working well into a sentence? If it is better than abysmal then sure they have played "well." If the definition is at least as well as league average then no they have not played even well. DD doesn't play well hurt, DD is hurt to often, etc.--not saying we may not want to draft or get a FA RB--but OL rush blocking is still far too inconsistant/just plain bad to be called well, good or any positive appelation. Their are OL's in this league that anyone could rush behind and OL's in this league that noone could rush behing--ours is much closer to the latter.

Hervoyel
12-11-2004, 10:45 PM
I disagree with them and do not feel that the o-line has been blocking well in the second half of the season. I don't think DD is going to be the answer to our needs in the long run. Of course if he wants to bust loose for 1,500 yards next year to prove me wrong I'm not going to have a problem with that. I don't think it's likely to happen though.

This year the running game became a problem due to a convergence of reasons. Davis got off to a bad start against San Diego and Detroit with four fumbles and that set him back, the new blocking scheme and addition of new starters, Wade missing time in the middle of the year and the poor play of his backup, Carr calling what can only be described as absolutely stupid audibles at bad situations, and the move of Chester Pitts to guard for the first time all contributed to the running game being sub-par.

Saying DD is the sole reason the running game sucks is like saying that Palmer is the sole reason that the offense sucks. He's a part of it and should get his share of the blame but he's not the only problem there.

Fiddy
12-11-2004, 10:55 PM
Saying DD is the sole reason the running game sucks is like saying that Palmer is the sole reason that the offense sucks. He's a part of it and should get his share of the blame but he's not the only problem there.I agree with Hervoyel. Its well known, and I mean WELL KNOWN, that I am not the biggest Davis supporter for him as a featured back but not even I am going to blame all the problems of the runnning game on him...

bckey
12-12-2004, 01:33 AM
I disagree with them and do not feel that the o-line has been blocking well in the second half of the season. I don't think DD is going to be the answer to our needs in the long run. Of course if he wants to bust loose for 1,500 yards next year to prove me wrong I'm not going to have a problem with that. I don't think it's likely to happen though.

This year the running game became a problem due to a convergence of reasons. Davis got off to a bad start against San Diego and Detroit with four fumbles and that set him back, the new blocking scheme and addition of new starters, Wade missing time in the middle of the year and the poor play of his backup, Carr calling what can only be described as absolutely stupid audibles at bad situations, and the move of Chester Pitts to guard for the first time all contributed to the running game being sub-par.

Saying DD is the sole reason the running game sucks is like saying that Palmer is the sole reason that the offense sucks. He's a part of it and should get his share of the blame but he's not the only problem there.


Well said. I'm still not liking the idea of switching to a zone blocking scheme in our 3rd year. Capers should have thought about doing it from the first game of the 2002 season. It is not a brand new scheme that he just got wind of. Man blocking does still work and we were progressing last year. It could eventually cost Capers his job if it ends up taking too long for our OL to learn. He got fired in Carolina after his 3rd year. I could only hope. I say he gets fired after our 4th year if we aren't at least 9-7 next year. .500 won't cut it our 4th year. My nightmare would be Capers getting fired and Palmer being promoted to head coach.

Here is an article from a couple of weeks ago on zone blocking.

Offensive line experiencing tough transition to new approach
By CARLTON THOMPSON


If Joe Pendry knows why the Texans' offensive line hasn't performed better, he's not sharing the reasons with the media.

The Texans' first-year offensive line coach said he didn't have time for an interview Wednesday, which is nothing new, considering he hasn't had time since taking the job. When asked if he thought he'd ever have time, Pendry smiled and uttered one of the few words he has said to a reporter this season.

"Nope."

Hopefully for the Texans, he has better answers for his players.

After making significant improvement from 2002 to 2003, the Texans have yet to hit a comfort zone with their new zone-blocking scheme.

The Texans used a man-blocking scheme during their first two years under Tony Marciano, who was reassigned to tight ends coach to make room on the staff for Pendry. During the offseason, the team switched to the zone-blocking scheme that has helped teams such as Denver, Green Bay and Baltimore rank among the NFL's best at running the football.

It seemed like a good idea at the time, and coach Dom Capers and the offensive linemen believe the switch ultimately will be for the best. Nevertheless, the transition has been anything but smooth.

The Texans rank last in the NFL, averaging just 3.4 yards per rushing attempt, and before quarterback David Carr scrambled for 24 yards last Sunday against Green Bay, they were the only team in the league without a run of at least 20 yards.

The Texans' longest run by a running back came courtesy of Jonathan Wells, who had a 14-yard carry Oct. 3 against Oakland.

"I don't think it's as much the zone blocking," Capers said. "I think you see the most successful running teams in the league use zone blocking. Are we getting what we want out of our running game? No. We're not happy with the yards per carry and that type of thing, but I think it all fits together. It's not necessarily just the zone-blocking scheme. I think that's an easy out."

Translation: If the Texans don't execute, it doesn't matter which blocking scheme they use.

"In a man-blocking scheme, you have a specific man to block no matter where he goes," left guard Chester Pitts said. "In a zone-blocking scheme, you basically have a track or a path, and whoever comes on that path, that's who you block.

"To me, I don't care what system is in. If I block my guy, do what I'm supposed to do, use good technique and do it the way I'm taught, that's going to work. Both ways have proven to work. If everyone does what they're supposed to do, you're going to get positive yardage."

The Texans ultimately hope to be able to run the ball as effectively as the Broncos, Packers and Ravens, but it's worth noting those teams' linemen have played together and in the same system for years. The Texans have new starters at three positions on the line, and right guard Zach Wiegert is the only player with previous experience in a zone-blocking scheme, and that was 11 years ago at Nebraska.

"We're a much better offensive line than we were last year," Wiegert said. "We're a lot more physical, better pass blockers. I know it doesn't show; we've been behind in a lot of games lately. We're a much-improved line, no doubt. Guys aren't getting physically beaten very often. It's just a play here or there.

"This system is good. Our running game was OK last year, but it wasn't where it needed to be. We ran the ball because we didn't want to throw too much. To be the kind of offense we want to be, where you get to the playoffs and things like that, we need to take the next step and learn this blocking scheme. Once you get it down, this is definitely the best blocking scheme. Look at Denver. It doesn't matter who they put in the backfield."

Are the Texans to that point yet? With apologies to Pendry ... nope.

big sarge
12-12-2004, 01:36 AM
Like i said before when dd is running then Carr gets hot. He needs to regain his confidence and just run the damn ball!!!!!!!

disaacks3
12-12-2004, 02:51 AM
Barry Sanders, in his prime, would be hard-pressed to make the Texans line look "good" this year. These guys weren't the best even before they switched to a zone-blocking scheme (which they're still having major issues with).

You don't rank dead-last because of your running back, you rank last because of your O-line...it's as simple as that.

infantrycak
12-12-2004, 10:15 AM
You don't rank dead-last because of your running back, you rank last because of your O-line...it's as simple as that.

Thank you disaacks--absolutely freakin true. That's a corollary to you don't have 5 negative yardage running plays out of six (see Hollings starting against the Jags last year) because of the RB it is because of the OL. What is amazing this year is that Carr has 48 plays over 20 yards this year behind this OL. Once they come together/it gets fixed some how, Carr and the Texans are finally going to hit their stride. AJ is on pace for 1300 yards and 2nd in the AFC with no time to get open--imagine what he and Gaff/Armstrong will do if Carr gets to sit back and knit sweaters like Favre, Manning, etc.

LiveForTheGame
12-12-2004, 10:27 AM
The problem isn't necessarily Davis, but the problem is the running game. It is a combination of the o-line not blocking well consistently and Davis really not running well this season except for the 100 yard game. The running game as a whole is what has been the problem, not one unit or person all together. It's the same thing with the passing game. It isn't always just Carr's fault when he makes a bad read or something goes wrong. They play as a whole and if one person does something different, it causes problems. The problem is that they aren't playing as one solid offensive unit yet. Look at the Colts for example. They're offense is thriving right now, but it's because they are finally one solid unit. Same thing with the Eagles and other top offensive teams.

LiveForTheGame
12-12-2004, 10:30 AM
You can't count on him though. How do you build a ground game around a back who may or may not be ready to go in a league that has a short 16 game schedule? Every game is incredibly important (unlike in the NBA or the MLB's where you can miss time here and there and not affect the team), and not knowing if your feature back will be ready to play is a big problem if you want to be anything other than a .500 team.


Exactly right. It's always difficult to prepare and know what is going to happen in that spot when the starter is injured or not ready. Reguardless of it being RB. However, in this instance- the line can't block well for Davis if they aren't sure if he'll be carrying the ball because every back is different and runs differently. It's also a distraction and hurts the mental attitude of a team not knowing if the guy they need to count on will be ready or not.

Doug
12-12-2004, 08:08 PM
Had it not been for DD the Texans wouldn't have stayed in this game today.

Beastlyman2003
12-12-2004, 08:39 PM
agreed, i have always been, as fiddy knows, an avid DD supporter. Today the oline was producing lanes and DD was exploiting them on his way to 190 total
yards(130 rushing). When the line is plowing the road, Domanick is gonna produce.
BOTTOM LINE.

big sarge
12-12-2004, 10:09 PM
I'm not so sure about DD, but I do know that he needs more confidence. Without that he is nothing, and by confidence I mean in the o-line and within himself hanging on to the ball. He is a hell of a running back, but I'm not so sure he's a good fit for the Texans because he seems fragile.

Fiddy
12-12-2004, 11:05 PM
agreed, i have always been, as fiddy knows, an avid DD supporter. Today the oline was producing lanes and DD was exploiting them on his way to 190 total
yards(130 rushing). When the line is plowing the road, Domanick is gonna produce.
BOTTOM LINE.He got 190 total yards and we lost because teams will be happy to give Davis 190 yards. Do you not think that if the Colts wanted to stop Davis, they would bring people up to the line??? They didnt bring people up on the line because they wanted Davis to carry the load, they werent scared of him. I dont think I will find one person on this board, including yourself Beastly and TexansTrueFan, who would say that the 190 yards Julius Jones got last week wasnt a different 190 yards that Davis got. Jones' 190 got safties creeping to the line and allowed Keyshawn-freaking-Johnson to catch a 40 TD pass, Davis' 190 yards didnt allow AJ to get free deep. Of the 6 games where Davis has touched the ball 30 times, we are 0-6. The 3 times that Julius Jones has had 30 touches in a game, the Cowboys are 2-1 with the lone loss against the Ravens. Davis will produce but his producing doesnt make defensive coordinators lose sleep. Opposing coaches think everytime Davis touches the ball instead of AJ is a plus. I dont think I have seen a CB jump on a play action fake to Davis all year long.

HJam72
12-12-2004, 11:13 PM
He got 190 total yards and we lost because teams will be happy to give Davis 190 yards. Do you not think that if the Colts wanted to stop Davis, they would bring people up to the line??? They didnt bring people up on the line because they wanted Davis to carry the load, they werent scared of him. I dont think I will find one person on this board, including yourself Beastly and TexansTrueFan, who would say that the 190 yards Julius Jones got last week wasnt a different 190 yards that Davis got. Jones' 190 got safties creeping to the line and allowed Keyshawn-freaking-Johnson to catch a 40 TD pass, Davis' 190 yards didnt allow AJ to get free deep. Of the 6 games where Davis has touched the ball 30 times, we are 0-6. The 3 times that Julius Jones has had 30 touches in a game, the Cowboys are 2-1 with the lone loss against the Ravens. Davis will produce but his producing doesnt make defensive coordinators lose sleep. Opposing coaches think everytime Davis touches the ball instead of AJ is a plus. I dont think I have seen a CB jump on a play action fake to Davis all year long.


Yes, DD got 190 yards. 62 of those yards were on dump off passes, because Carr couldn't find a real receiver. Why? Because the O-line couldn't protect him long enough. It's true. They love for DD to get the ball ON PASS PLAYS. I don't know if DD is the real deal or not. I'm just not sure. What I do know is that our O-line is a much, much bigger problem. Handoffs to DD should happen often and are a good thing. Passes to DD should be embarrassing to the O-line (and sometimes Carr, who just can't FIND the open receiver at this point). SHAME, SHAME!!!

If DD always played the way he did today, this team SHOULD win A LOT of big games, but it's not his fault that he's our #1 receiver. He doesn't even want that job.

"I dont think I have seen a CB jump on a play action fake to Davis all year long."

Yeah, that's because DD has had a bad year, for the most part. Like I said, I still don't know what to think about him. But, today it was absolutely not DD's fault that we lost. Anytime he RUNS well, it's not his fault that he is also the #1 receiver.

Fiddy
12-12-2004, 11:25 PM
Because the O-line couldn't protect him long enough.Point excatly, shouldnt Davis carving up the run defense allow a little more time on pass plays??? It doesnt because teams are playing pass. One play that signifies that was after Davis had a couple of good carries in a row and Carr did a play fake to Davis, Freeney who had gotten by Wand didnt even attempt to go to Davis and just put his head down and went after Carr. The play fake wasnt even done and Freeney made up his mind that he was going after Carr. The result a sack. Yeah, Wand didnt do a good job but shouldnt a play fake at least freeze Freeney for a second??? He wasnt scared of Davis, he was scared of Carr finding one of the wideouts open. The same thing happened the other way but when Manning faked it to James, the entire front seven for the defense STOPPED. There was no stopping when the fake was issused to Davis. The Texans defense was scared of James, the Colts defense wasnt scared of Davis.


Everyone here would agree with me that the O-line for the Chargers last year was horrible, right??? Well, LT made it look good and because defenses fear LT, they waited on the play fake and in return the Chargers only allowed 29 sacks last year which was 6th best in the AFC and 11th best in the entire league. A play fake to the RB is suppose to freeze people, play fakes to Davis dont scare people.

HJam72
12-12-2004, 11:32 PM
Davis' production for the year may be a problem. I'm just saying that his production today was not. Maybe you have to make a name for yourself by playing well for several games in a row before the defense bites on fake handoffs. At the same time, though, the O-line needs to protect Carr better, whether the DLs are worried about DD or not.

Some people have said that when DD does well it automatically hurts the team somehow. I'm simply refuting that--at least the part where it's DDs fault that they lose. There's no such thing as a runningback who rushes for 128 yards (with no fumbles) and catches 68 yards in passes, who can also be blamed for the loss on that particular day. I suppose he could drop all the pass and teach Carr to stop throwing everything to him, lol. Now, that might help a little bit in the long run.

Fiddy
12-12-2004, 11:44 PM
It doesnt automatically hurt us but the games we win are the games where Andre Johnson goes off, like earlier in the year.

The following link is a link to what happens when Davis is the focal point of the offense and when AJ is the focal point of the offense:
http://www.houstontexans.com/fan_zone/messageboards/showthread.php?t=3391

HJam72
12-12-2004, 11:45 PM
There is another possiblity here. I don't pay a whole lot of attention to what the other teams defense is doing. If they're playing zone cover 2s (or zone cover whatever) on every play and dropping back the LBs, while maybe even pulling DLs and moving them all around to pressure the QB, then DDs rushing yardage is much less impressive. If they're using cover one, man-on-man covers on every play and letting the LBs stay in place and just watch the ball, then DDs rushing yardage is much more impressive.

I noticed that our D used a lot of 2 DL defenses today and A LOT of DBs to try and stop the passing, but they still got some pressure on the QB and mananged to STOP THE RUN. I was impressed. I've no doubt they were dropping the LBs back most of the time too, but they STILL stopped the run pretty well.

wags
12-12-2004, 11:55 PM
Davis had 201 total yards today. What's wrong with DD catching it on dump off? He averaged 12 yards a catch today. That's 12 yards. A back who can catch out of the backfield is a weapon, not a liability. LT caught 100 balls last year. I would love for Carr to hit AJ, Bradford, or Gaff deep, but until the protection is there I have no problem with DD catching and running for 8-9 yards.

Maybe the better question is why does David Carr always say "they covered up all my receivers." Can our receivers find a window in the cover 2? Apparently not.

Fiddy
12-12-2004, 11:58 PM
LT caught 100 balls last year.And didnt the Chargers have the first pick in the draft??? Last year LT averaged 7.7 catches per game and they were the worst team in the league, this year LT is averaging 3.6 catches per game and the Chargers are leading the AFC West. I wouldnt mind if Davis was catching these balls and we were winning but he is catching them and we arent winning. At the end of the day, I want "W's." That is what a team is measured by.

HJam72
12-13-2004, 12:04 AM
This is how I understand it. On a cover 2 the defense is smuthering the sidelines (basically) with DBs (and maybe some LBs) to stop the wideouts from getting receptions. Specifically, they're sending the safeties back and to the sidelines. Shouldn't that mean that there would be open areas in the middle, especially deep? Why isn't someone getting open deep down the middle? Tight-end? Or receiver? My guess is that by the time this happens Carr is on the ground. Add to that the fact that Carr is not reading all of his receivers on the play anyway and you've got a real problem throwing against the cover 2. Also, on the cover 2 the LBs should be dropping back (not blitzing, most likely), so that means the DLs are getting to car on their own, without any help from the LBs. This is really bad.

Fiddy
12-13-2004, 12:08 AM
This is how I understand it. On a cover 2 the defense is smuthering the sidelines (basically) with DBs (and maybe some LBs) to stop the wideouts from getting receptions. Specifically, they're sending the safeties back and to the sidelines. Shouldn't that mean that there would be open areas in the middle, especially deep? Why isn't someone getting open deep down the middle? Tight-end? Or receiver? My guess is that by the time this happens Carr is on the ground. Add to that the fact that Carr is not reading all of his receivers on the play anyway and you've got a real problem throwing against the cover 2. Also, on the cover 2 the LBs should be dropping back (not blitzing, most likely), so that means the DLs are getting to car on their own, without any help from the LBs. This is really bad.You are suppose to attack the seams in the Cover 2 and the safties cover split the field in half. The CBs jam the WRs at the line and then play the flats and the LBs do drop into coverage so you have the main scheme of the thing down. And yes the TE should be open but Carr doesnt even look at the TE. You can tell when the pass is going to Davis because Carr makes up his mind at the snap of the ball so his drop back is different. And thats not on Davis...

wags
12-13-2004, 12:09 AM
If as David Carr says "all our receivers were covered up," then you have to throw to Davis. If you go with an empty backfield and take DD out of the game Carr will get killed. Teams only rush four guys because that's all it takes to sack Carr five times. If our O-line can protect better, then the defense will have to bring more than four guys and maybe then our receivers can get open.

We don't lose games because of DD. We lose games because we are not a good team. Our O-line is bad and we have one of the worst defenses in the league.

HJam72
12-13-2004, 12:09 AM
And didnt the Chargers have the first pick in the draft??? Last year LT averaged 7.7 catches per game and they were the worst team in the league, this year LT is averaging 3.6 catches per game and the Chargers are leading the AFC West. I wouldnt mind if Davis was catching these balls and we were winning but he is catching them and we arent winning. At the end of the day, I want "W's." That is what a team is measured by.

Your runningback should NOT be your #1 receiver. That's just really bad. A dump off to your RB is just a good run play. That's all it is. If all your passes are dump-offs like that, then it's like you have no passing game at all. Even the most staunch rushing advocates will want that occasional and unexpected pass that's good for 45 yards to AJ and a possible TD run after the catch. No matter how good your offense is otherwise, you still need to get SOME big plays to win games, because the other team certainly will.

Fiddy
12-13-2004, 12:12 AM
Your runningback should NOT be your #1 receiver. That's just really bad.See, thats what defenses dictate. They want Davis to be the #1 reciever because Davis wont take a 5 yard dump down 40 yards for the TD.

Fiddy
12-13-2004, 12:13 AM
Our O-line is bad and we have one of the worst defenses in the league.Dont call the defense bad today. They held Manning and Co. to only 23 points. They werent a problem.

HJam72
12-13-2004, 12:21 AM
Fiddy, you've given some good stats on how the Texans have lost when DD had big games. Obviously, we agree that DD should not be the #1 receiver, but you seem to also be saying that even in spite of his efforts on good rushing days, he is somehow hurting the passing game. You eve argued that he hurt the passing game last year, when he was rushing so well, and gave stats to that effect.

My question is HOW is he hurting the passing game. Could it be that Carr is just thinking, "Hey, DD can run. I'll just throw all my passes to him." Other than that kind of bonehead thinking by Carr, which I don't know is the problem or not, I don't see how DD is hurting the passing game. I know that Carr's not getting enough protection. You've stated that the D is not biting on the fake hand-offs right now. I THINK that's becuase DD hasn't rushed well for most of this year. Were they not biting on fake hand-offs last year either?

You've given evidence that something might be happening, but I don't think anybody knows WHY it's happening. Got any ideas?

How was Carr's passing on the day that Wells rushed for over 100? I don't remember.

Hervoyel
12-13-2004, 12:28 AM
I think that what Davis can give you is enough if you can also throw the ball. He's not going to ever be the second coming of Barry Sanders but Davis producing isn't the problem. Davis is going to get you a hundred yards if the blocking is there like it was the majority of the afternoon today and that's "good enough". The problem is the offense not being able to protect the QB when they have to pass. There's no time and you end up with a dump off to Davis and a game summary that's way lopsided.

1. When Davis gets the ball on a handoff is that his fault? No of course not. His number is called and he runs the ball. Good for Davis when he gets some yards out of it. If he could run the ball like he did today all the time then the Texans would be in posession of their coveted "franchise back". So take his 128 yards and call them good stuff.

2. When Davis is dumped off the ball as a result of Carr not finding anyone open (or not seeing the guy who is open) is that Davis fault? No, of course not. He's getting the dump off and he's going to do whatever he can with it. Generally I'd say we have a very good target in DD as far as safetly valves go. He's got good hands and he generally gets good yardage off of those passes.

So what's wrong here? What's wrong is that the Texans seem unable to use Davis AND use anyone else. Defenses are taking away the pass and leaving us the run for as long as they can without it hurting them. Eventually they take that away when it starts to threaten. The whole point is that when the Texans can't run the ball they become one dimensional and teams crush the pocket and kill Carr. When the Texans CAN run the ball teams still crush the pocket on pass plays and kill Carr.

Problem? Pass protection. Solution? Protect the damned QB for more than 2 seconds.

If the Texans can figure out how to do this then there it is. I'm very curious to see what they do on the ground next week against Chicago. If they can run the ball against the Bears then I'm wondering if they're not starting to get the blocking scheme down. If they can run the ball roughly at this level over the last three games then I'm starting to feel good about the blocking scheme finally coming together. It won't win us games without the pass protection being there but at least it will mean they've solved half the equation.

They might just figure out how to run block before they figure out how to pass protect. Now if they'd just figure out how to stop the false starts.

HJam72
12-13-2004, 12:38 AM
It is true that DD is not a major threat to break one for 80 yards, whether he gets it by hand-off or pass, but he still gets first downs. You'd think they would bite on those fakes more. There was a time when I thought Carr's fakes were a joke that wouldn't fool anyone, but I don't really think that's the problem now. Or is it?

I know one thing: I saw some O-linemen on their butts today. I bet that has something to do with it.

Trey581
12-13-2004, 12:39 AM
As I sat and watched the game against the colts today, I saw the Texans defense sorta step up. Domanick Davis finally has broken out and it seems that he is just now starting his season. He helped us stay in the game. One thing that was so terrible to me, were the calls made by the refs. It seems like the whole NFL just wants Peyton Manning to clench the record. I watched as Peyton walked to the Texans line to cry to the refs. about the fumble that was clearly the Texans ball. There was also another fumble that again could have been the Texans ball. Aaron Glenn was called for pass interference late in the game and he never even was around the guy when the ball was near him. It's bad when everyone in the NFL organization just wants to help out Peyton so he can get his record. I also thought it was very childish to walk up to the refs and whine so much. I think that that is the main reason why we lost todays game.

HJam72
12-13-2004, 01:04 AM
What about DDs production? He rushed for 128 yards. Is it possible that that's not enough? What I mean is that if the D focused on the pass on every play the entire game (this is kind of a make believe scenario...I think?) then is it possible that DDs 128 is really not enough. Is it possible that he should've had 200 yds. today if he was actually a good RB?

What if you could beat a good passing team by focusing on the pass and allowing their goofy, over-valued, RB to run for 128 and catch a bunch of dump-offs? The safeties split the field on every play, the corners won't allow the quick-out (or whatever it's called), the LBs drop back, and the DLs pin their ears back, ignore the RB, and zone in on David Carr. What if you did this the whole freaking game and they get 128 rushing and a total joke of a passing game against you? shouldn't a good RB just ABSOLUTELY KILL YOU in that situation? Is that what their defense did to us? Isn't that kind of what we tried on them and they still passed on us, lol?

Could it be that DD really did have a bad game?

Nah....I think Seth Wand sat on his rear end too much, but I'd sure like to see DD catch a dump-off and bust one for 80 yards, while running over a few DBs in the process. He needs to do that. It would really help the situation.

TexansTrueFan
12-13-2004, 03:43 AM
hmmm they say the o-line isnt the problem huh,,,hmmm i wonder why Carr got sacked 5 times today. if they cant pass block for anything what makes ya think they are much better at run blocking ? D.D has what it takes and LATELY he has had is form from last year back, and has been injury free for a while. I dont see how some of you can say he is only a 3rd down back. We would of been shut out today if not for Davis !!!!!!

HJam72
12-13-2004, 09:38 AM
I think you're right about the pass blocking, but the run blocking actually was pretty good. I don't know about great, but it was pretty good.

infantrycak
12-13-2004, 09:40 AM
I dont think I will find one person on this board, including yourself Beastly and TexansTrueFan, who would say that the 190 yards Julius Jones got last week wasnt a different 190 yards that Davis got. Jones' 190 got safties creeping to the line and allowed Keyshawn-freaking-Johnson to catch a 40 TD pass, Davis' 190 yards didnt allow AJ to get free deep.

IMO, that is drawing a conclusion you desire by selected inferences rather than a look at the whole picture. AJ doesn't play for the Cowboys. Unless you get Barry Sanders on the Texans and an OL, teams are going to be more worried about the damage AJ can do than ANY RB the Texans have. That is not so much a slight to the RB as it is a compliment to AJ. Seriously, you're the coach--who are you more likely to put in man coverage--Keyshawn-freaking-Johnson or AJ?

The Wal-Mart
12-13-2004, 12:32 PM
DD was the offense for the Texans today. He is the only reason the game was as close as it was. It's ridiculous that people here are blaming his production for the loss. When he doesn't produce its get rid of him, when he does produce its he didn't do enough. He had 200 total friggin yards. That's a great day for any running back against any defense. It's not his fault that Carr can't find the open man, receivers aren't running or breaking their routes to get open, and the O-line can't pass protect. In the beginning he was injured and running not to fumble, but now he looks like the franchise back everyone thought he would be. He's certainly better than our feature backs of year one the Stacey Mack/Jonathan Wells duo. I would love to see Andre thrown to 8-10 times per game even when he's covered but that's not gonna happen. One there's no pass protection, Two he's usually doubled, and Three it's gonna get picked like in the Jets game. The problem is the Texans don't spread the ball around. Get Gaffney involved, Miller, Armstrong, Bradford. Throwing to those guys will open up AJ and the passing game should flourish.

Wolf
12-13-2004, 12:37 PM
we don't spread the ball around enough.

2003 San diego chargers had a back that ran for over 1500 yards and had 100 receptions ... their reward .. 1st pick in the draft.


DD is not even close to LT's status


Julius jones ran for all that and had 3 TD's he was the difference..Teams know they can let us give DD the ball all day long and he isn't going to break one open. oh he'll get his yards, but the defense doesn't have to change their way of playing, just to stop him.

Fiddy
12-13-2004, 04:26 PM
Fiddy, you've given some good stats on how the Texans have lost when DD had big games. Obviously, we agree that DD should not be the #1 receiver, but you seem to also be saying that even in spite of his efforts on good rushing days, he is somehow hurting the passing game. You eve argued that he hurt the passing game last year, when he was rushing so well, and gave stats to that effect.I am not saying he is hurting the passing game, he hurts the stats for the passing game yes but what I am saying is teams will give him the yards because he wont kill the oppenent. If Clinton Portis or LT start racking up big yards on the ground, teams bring the safety up and stop the run and that allows big pass plays. They dont stop Davis because Davis isnt a Portis or LT and wont kill a team and teams know that they can give him yards and stop AJ/Bradford/Gaffney/Armstrong/Miller and win the game. If you name every effective offense in the league, they have a game breaking back, we have an average back. Look at the difference Willis McGahee made to the Bills. Henry was a nice grind it out back but McGahee added that extra speed and ever since he started taking the carries Beldsoe has been sacked a whole lot less (4.75 sacks per game during the first four when Henry got the load and only 1.5 sacks a game since McGahee has gotten the load) and the Bills have gotten over .500 after a 0-4 start.

IMO, that is drawing a conclusion you desire by selected inferences rather than a look at the whole picture. AJ doesn't play for the Cowboys. Unless you get Barry Sanders on the Texans and an OL, teams are going to be more worried about the damage AJ can do than ANY RB the Texans have. That is not so much a slight to the RB as it is a compliment to AJ. Seriously, you're the coach--who are you more likely to put in man coverage--Keyshawn-freaking-Johnson or AJ?Shouldnt Davis at least get defenses putting single coverage on Bradford or Gaffney??? Defenses dont have to do anything out of the ordinary to stop Davis so Gaff and Bradford arent getting the single coverage...

Julius jones ran for all that and had 3 TD's he was the difference..Teams know they can let us give DD the ball all day long and he isn't going to break one open. oh he'll get his yards, but the defense doesn't have to change their way of playing, just to stop him.EXACTLY!!!

TheOgre
12-13-2004, 04:47 PM
DD has shown the explosiveness over the last 2-3 weeks that was missing from him most of the season. He has been playing up to last year's standards so far this year. He isn't a top tier back, but he looks like he can be productive.

wags
12-13-2004, 05:32 PM
If Clinton Portis or LT start racking up big yards on the ground, teams bring the safety up and stop the run and that allows big pass plays.

So why do we have more big passing plays than both the Chargers and Redskins?

Texans: 43 completions over 20 yards, 5 comp over 40 yards
Chargers: 34 comp over 20, 7 over 40
Redskins: 19 over 20, 4 over 40

HJam72
12-13-2004, 05:39 PM
I am not saying he is hurting the passing game


Yes you are, lol, and I'm starting to believe you. All those cover 2s require dropping back the LBs. If DD were more of a break-away threat, they'd have to stop using the cover 2 so much and go with man coverage to stop him at the line. That still wouldn't help all that much with the pass protection (it would some), but it would sure help with getting receivers open.

Fiddy
12-13-2004, 06:18 PM
So why do we have more big passing plays than both the Chargers and Redskins?

Texans: 43 completions over 20 yards, 5 comp over 40 yards
Chargers: 34 comp over 20, 7 over 40
Redskins: 19 over 20, 4 over 40The reason the Skins dont have many big plays is because Gibbs is still playing like it is the early 90s and is only sending two/three people on pass routes and keeping everyone else in to protect. The Chargers are also leading the AFC West so Marty-ball is working over there. And I remember 3 big plays in the KC game in the second half when we were coming back and Davis was on the sideline with an ankle problem. And then there were a couple to AJ and one to Gaff against the Raiders when Wells was the back. So if you take 6 of those 43 completions away because Davis wasnt the back you are at 37.

Yes you are, lol, and I'm starting to believe you. All those cover 2s require dropping back the LBs. If DD were more of a break-away threat, they'd have to stop using the cover 2 so much and go with man coverage to stop him at the line. That still wouldn't help all that much with the pass protection (it would some), but it would sure help with getting receivers open.He is not hurting the passing game by getting yards, he is hurting the passing game by being the type of back he is. Thats what I am trying to say.

But you are getting what I am saying. Against the Pats, the Colts had to stop Corey Dillion and were scared of him and Brady threw for 335 yards (more than Manning had). Against the Packers, the Colts had to stop Green and Favre went on to throw for 360 yards, etc. Against the Texans, the Colts wanted to have Davis carry the load and Carr only threw for 167.

HJam72
12-13-2004, 06:41 PM
OK, so how do you feel about Jonathon Wells playing and pass blocking? I'm not saying he is a permanent answer, though.

HJam72
12-13-2004, 06:59 PM
DD is not a break away threat. Neither is Wells and I know by that that you don't want him, at least not long term, anyway. Then we've got Hollings. I see hollings getting hurt over and over again, although he does apparently have speed. I also don't see him breaking tackles at all. It looks like we need a new RB more than I realized.

Fiddy
12-13-2004, 07:19 PM
OK, so how do you feel about Jonathon Wells playing and pass blocking? I'm not saying he is a permanent answer, though.I'd rather have Davis back there for this year and then in the draft get Ronnie Brown out of Auburn and then you move Davis to the 3rd down back role, something he will excel at.
Then we've got Hollings. I see hollings getting hurt over and over again, although he does apparently have speed. I also don't see him breaking tackles at all. It looks like we need a new RB more than I realized.Hollings has really let me down. I was leading his bandwagon and then he decides to injury himself every week.